DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims and Remarks
Claims 1 – 2 and 4 – 20 are pending.
The Examiner (not being the original Examiner) has decided to completely rewrite the office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 13 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
It is not clear as to what is the second of “beginning of a second.” What is second in regards to? As such, the metes and bounds cannot be clearly defined. Thus, the claim is indefinite.
Similarly, the language “the top of second of the virtual time source” in claim 14 does not indicate what the “second” is in reference. Second what? As such, the metes and bounds cannot be clearly defined. Thus, the claim is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4 – 15, 17 and 19 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurby (US 20190293802 A1).
NOTE: All citations are that of Kurby unless otherwise indicated.
As to claims 1, 12 and 17, Kurby discloses the method comprising:
determining a relationship between a property of a position, navigation, and timing (PNT)-based timing signal and a property of a virtual time source, the virtual time source being generated from a timing signal at a remote device and transferred over a network according to a specific network-based timing protocol; determining a state of the PNT-based timing signal at least partially responsive to the determined relationship (Para. 13 and Fig. 8);
(this feature specific to claim 12) wherein the detector senses a difference between a top of second of a virtual time source and a top of second of a PNT-basedtiming signal, the virtual time source being generated from a timing signal at a remote device and transferred over a network according to a specific network-based timing protocol (Para.13 “fall outside …” see also Para. 56.)
and one or more of:
providing the PNT-based timing signal at least partially responsive to determining that the state of the PNT-based timing signal corresponds to a first state;
disregarding the PNT-based timing signal at least partially responsive to determining that the state of the PNT-based timing signal corresponds to a second state (Para. 13); and
providing an indication of the state of the PNT-based timing signal at least partially responsive to determining that the state of the PNT-based timing signal corresponds to a second state.
As to claim 4, Kurby discloses the method of claim 1, comprising generating the PNT-based timing signal responsive to a PNT signal (Fig. 1 and Fig. 8)
As to claim 5, Kurby discloses the method of claim 4, comprising receiving the PNT signal from a source associated with a PNT service (Figs. 1 and 8).
As to claim 6, Kurby discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the source is one of a global- positioning system (GPS) satellite or a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) satellite (Figs. 1 and 8).
As to claim 7, Kurby discloses the method of claim 4, comprising determining a position responsive to the PNT signal (Figs. 1 and 8)..
As to claim 8, Kurby discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the determining the relationship comprises determining an alignment between the property of the PNT-based timing signal and the property of the virtual time source (Para. 13).
As to claim 9, Kurby discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the determining the relationship comprises determining a temporal correspondence between a top of second of the PNT-based timing signal and a corresponding top of second of the virtual time source (Para. 13).
As to claim 10, Kurby discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the state of the PNT- based timing signal comprises determining whether a top of second of the PNT-based timing signal is within a threshold duration from a top of second of the virtual time source (Para. 56 “fall out of the time search window 86”).
As to claim 11, Kurby discloses the method of claim 1, the method comprising providing an indication that the PNT-based timing signal is invalid at least partially responsive to determining that the state of the PNT-based timing signal corresponds to the second state (Para. 13 and 56).
As to claim 13 and as best understood, Kurby discloses the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the top of second of the virtual time source is indicative of a beginning of a second according to Universal Coordinated Time (UTC) (Paras. 13, 22 and 56).
As to claim 14 and as best understood, Kurby discloses the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the apparatus is to: obtain a timing signal indicative of the top of second of the virtual time source; generate, at least partially responsive to the PNT signal, a PNT-based timing signal indicative of the top of second according to the PNT signal; and compare the timing signal to the PNT-based timing signal (Paras. 13 & 56)
As to claim 15, Kurby discloses apparatus of claim 12, wherein the PNT signal is received from one of a global-positioning system (GPS) satellite or a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) satellite (Figs. 1 and 8).
As to claim 19, Kurby discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the receiver is to receive the PNT signal from a source associated with a PNT service (Figs. 1 and 8).
As to claim 20, Kurby discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the receiver is to determine a position at least partially responsive to the PNT signal (Figs. 1 and 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kurby in view of official notice.
As to claims 2, 16 and 18, Kurby does not mention the method of claim 1, 12 and 17 wherein the specific network- based timing protocol comprises Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 1588.
IEEE is open source thus not esoteric. IEEE 1588 is capable of instant demonstration as evidenced by the prosecution record. As such, the Examiner takes official notice that it is obvious to use IEEE 1558 to allow for standardized software thus reducing complexities and cost especially compared to making one’s own unique protocols instead of using those that are universally given out and that are already in use.
Claims 12 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kurby in view of Feller (US 20070064776 A1) or Tangudu (US 20110103432 A1).
As to claim 12, Kurby teaches an apparatus, comprising a detector to detect a presence of an anomaly in a position, navigation, and timing (PNT) signal (Figs. 1 and 8 and Paras. 13 and 56),
the virtual time source being generated from a timing signal at a remote device and transferred over a network according to a specific network-based timing protocol (Id.).
Applicant may argue that Kurby teachings of “if a fraudulent signal is manipulated so as to fall outside the time search window, the signal may be rejected or ignored. Moreover, the timing protocol may also be used in conjunction with periodic updates using positioning system signals” (Kurby Para. 13) is not the same as “a difference between a top of second of a virtual time source and a top of second of a PNT-basedtiming signal” (claim 12). The Examiner believes that falling outside of a search window meets the scope of a difference of start times, which the Examiner speculates is what is meant by the claimed “top” – refer to 112b. Nonetheless, the Examiner introduces a new reference to expedite prosecution.
In same field, Feller teaches “an MMT processor that 1) compares the outline of the start of the rising edge with a model of the outline of the rising edge of the received signal, …” see claim1.
In view of Fellter, it would be obvious to the artisan before filing to use start times in lieu of window because start times because start time would require less memory thus saving computation time.
Alternatively, Tangudu teaches “Code phase or code lag is the difference in time between the beginning of the 1 ms PN receiver issued Gold code for the SV and the beginning of the satellite-originated Gold code riding on that SV carrier (Para. 103).” Tangudu also teaches “Some embodiments called Mechanisms are described herein to solve cross correlation problems and other problems. The Mechanisms are provided for mitigation, detection, discrimination, identification or rejection of cross correlation in GPS receivers during acquisition and tracking with the aid of qualitatively improved hardware and/or software (Id.)”
In view of Tangudu, it would be obvious to the artisan before filing to use lag times (equivalent to start times) in lieu of window because start times because start time would require less memory thus saving computation time.
As to claim 13 and as best understood, Kurby in view of Felter, or alternatively, Tangudu, teaches the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the top of second of the virtual time source is indicative of a beginning of a second according to Universal Coordinated Time (UTC) (Para. 13, 22 and 56).
As to claim 14 and as best understood, Kurby in view of Felter, or alternatively, Tangudu, teaches the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the apparatus is to: obtain a timing signal indicative of the top of second of the virtual time source; generate, at least partially responsive to the PNT signal, a PNT-based timing signal indicative of the top of second according to the PNT signal; and compare the timing signal to the PNT-based timing signal (Paras. 13 & 56)
As to claim 15, Kurby in view of Felter, or alternatively, Tangudu, teaches the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the PNT signal is received from one of a global-positioning system (GPS) satellite or a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) satellite (Figs. 1 and 8).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL W JUSTICE whose telephone number is (571)270-7029. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 5:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Kelleher can be reached at 571-272-7753. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL W JUSTICE/Examiner, Art Unit 3648